Then he said to them,
"Give therefore to the emperor the things that are the emperor's, and to
God the things that are God's…" Matthew
22:21

The Occupy
Wall Street movement began on September 17 when about 1,000 demonstrators
marched on Wall Street and gathered at Zucotti
Park, what had been Liberty Square
Park. Media coverage was spotty and the reviews
were mostly negative. A September 23article titled “Gunning for Wall Street with Faulty Aim,” by N.Y. Times
columnist Ginia Bellafante was a pretty typical take.[1] She wrote: “a diffuse and leaderless
convocation of activists against greed, corporate influence, gross social
inequality and other nasty byproducts of wayward capitalism not easily
extinguishable by street theater, had hoped to see many thousands join its
protest and encampment, which began Sept. 17. According to the group, 2,000
marched on the first day; news outlets estimated that the number was closer to
several hundred. By Wednesday morning,” she continued. “100 or so stalwarts
were making the daily, peaceful trek through the financial district, where
their movements were circumscribed by barricades and a heavy police presence.
(By Saturday, scores of arrests were made.) By Thursday, the number still
sleeping in Zuccotti
Park, the central base of
operations, appeared to be dwindling further.”

She
concluded, "The group’s lack of cohesion and its apparent wish to
pantomime progressivism rather than practice it knowledgeably is unsettling in
the face of the challenges so many of its generation face – finding work,
repaying student loans, figuring out ways to finish college when money has run
out."[2]

But Bellafante’s
critique was, perhaps, a little hasty.
Today, the movement has grown to demonstrations in more than 95 cities
around the world involving tens of thousands of people. There are those who are equating it with the
Arab Spring up-rising. We shall
see. Like that uprising, there is no
clear leader. It is a genuinely populist
movement being driven, in this social media age, by ordinary people using Twitter,
Facebook and Text messaging.

Sounding
somewhat like Ginia Bellafante, Peggy Noonan of The Wall Street Journal recently wrote, “Occupy Wall Street is not
in itself important—it is obvious at this point that it's less a political
movement than a be-in. It's unfocused, unserious in its aims.”[3]

But Noonan
did not completely dismiss the movement, writing, “…it is an early expression,
an early iteration, of something that is coming, and that is a rising up
against current circumstances and arrangements. OWS is an expression of
American discontent, and others will follow. The protests will grow as the
economy gets worse.”[4]

Insightfully
she wrote, “A movement that will go nowhere but could do real damage would be
‘We hate the rich, let's stick it to them.’ Movements built on hatred are
corrosive, and in the end corrode themselves. Ask Robespierre...”[5]

She
continued, “A movement that would be helpful and could actually help bring change
would be one that said, ‘Enough. Wall Street is selfish and dishonest, and Washington is selfish
and dishonest. Together their selfishness and dishonesty, their operating as if
they are not part of a whole, not part of a nation of relationships and
responsibilities, tanked a great nation's economy. We will reform.’"[6]

It will be
interesting to see how the Occupy Wall Street movement develops. My guess is that it is not going to dwindle
away. There is too much pain and
distress in this country which is being ignored by those in power. Consequently, those with little power are
finding no other outlet. What began as
an easily dismissed movement in this country has become a confrontation that is
forcing a clarification of values, challenging us all, and especially our
nation’s leadership, Republican and Democrat, conservative and liberal, to consider what’s most important...

Then the Pharisees went and plotted to
entrap Jesus in what he said. So they
sent their disciples to him, along with the Herodians, saying, "Teacher,
we know that you are sincere, and teach the way of God in accordance with
truth, and show deference to no one; for you do not regard people with
partiality. Tell us, then, what you think. Is it lawful to pay taxes to the
emperor, or not?” (Matthew 22:15-17).

We are in chapter 22 of Matthew’s
Gospel, late in the Gospel…We are in Jerusalem….It
is after Palm Sunday, after Jesus’ triumphal entry. His passion and the cross lie ahead in the
shadows…What began as an easily dismissed movement, the Jesus movement, has
been growing in popularity and numbers.
It has increasingly captured the attention of the people and resonated
with them; resonated with their aches and pains. It has also captured the attention of the Jerusalem religious
leadership. The leadership finds Jesus
and his movement threatening. His
teaching is unorthodox. It is
destabilizing. They don’t like him. They are heavily invested in the status
quo. And in this moment; this moment
described in chapter 22, their dislike has forced a confrontation; a confrontation
that turns out to be about clarifying values…

Our reading
begins by telling us, “…the Pharisees
went and plotted to entrap Jesus in what he said. So they sent their disciples to him, along
with the Herodians”(Matthew22:15). There
is no secret about it; the Pharisees are out to get Jesus. They send people to entrap him. Among them are the Herodians….Who are the
Herodians?

We don’t
much about them; there is not a lot of information written but, from their name,
we can infer that they are supporters of the Herod, the Jewish King who is a
puppet of the Roman Empire…Why do they send
these Herodians to entrap Jesus? Well
the question they ask of him makes it very clear: "Teacher,
we know that you are sincere, and teach the way of God in accordance with truth,
and show deference to no one; for you do not regard people with partiality….”
(Matthew 22:16). We should not take
their compliments at face value. They are not being sincere….They are smarmy….It’s
a set-up.
Er, uh Tell us, then, what you think. Is it lawful to pay taxes to the
emperor, or not? Bang, the trap is
sprung! It’s brilliant. It’s a darned if you do, darned if you don’t
question.

If Jesus
says yes, it’s lawful to pay the taxes, the tribute to the emperor, meaning
lawful under Jewish law, under the Torah, Jesus will lose credibility and
popular standing with the people who are visceral in their opposition to Rome
and its occupation of their country, who find the poll tax an oppressive burden
to support the occupying power and also find it blasphemous and wrong under the
law as the land belongs to God and not Caesar.
If Jesus supports paying the tax, he risks losing popular support.

If, on the
other hand, Jesus says it is unlawful to pay the taxes, then he risks being
charged with sedition and Rome
was very hard on seditionists, as Jesus’ later crucifixion clearly illustrates. The question posed by the disciples of the
Pharisees and the Herodians appears to offer him no good choice….He appears to
face a dilemma…

But Jesus
is not a simpleton or fool. He knows
what they are up to. He is also not
afraid of confrontation. This is a
battle of wits and they came unprepared.
Jesus, aware of their malice,
said, "Why are you putting me to the test, you hypocrites? Show me the coin used for the tax." And
they brought him a denarius (Matthew 22:18 – 19). The denarius was a silver
Roman coin that represented a day’s wage.
Note well, Jesus does not pull the coin out of his own pocket, he asks
them to produce it.

He said to them, "Whose head is this,
and whose title?" They answered,
"The emperor's."(Matthew 22:20)The Oxford Bible Commentary observes, “…the coin being in the
possession of Jesus’ opponents highlights their insincerity: they have no qualms about using pagan money
-- and even bring a coin with the emperor’s image and blasphemous inscription
into the holy precincts of the temple.”[7]

Jesus said to them, "Give
therefore to the emperor the things that are the emperor's, and to God the
things that are God’s” (Matthew 22:21).

It is a brilliant, the perfect
response. The Oxford Bible Commentary is helpful in making clear what has happened
in this exchange. It states, “Instead of
trapping Jesus, the Pharisees and Herodians are trapped by him. Jesus’ words distance him from those who oppose
supporting Rome. At the same time, the inclusion of giving to
God what is God’s relativizes the political obligation. There is here, no firm principle of loyal
submission to the state. Implied,
rather, is a reservation regarding the state and a lack of reservation
regarding God. While obedience to God
can…coexist with doing what the state requires, obligation to the former
overshadows obligation to the latter. So
there is no simple or straightforward rule, but the imperative to the weigh the
demands of two (very unequal) authorities.
When those demands are not at odds, obligations to both can be met….In
cases of conflict, however, it is manifest which authority requires allegiance”[8]
which brings us back to the Occupy Wall Street movement and its concerns.

What are
the demands God makes of us in our current political and economic climate? Are there moral and religious values at
stake? To be sure, there are. Just as there was no coin, no person, or
anything else in Caesar’s reign that did not first belong to God, so in our
realm all belongs to God as well, and all is of concern to God, including how
each and every person is treated. The common good is not merely a political
value, it is a Christian imperative! We cannot compartmentalize our religious
convictions and beliefs from our political and economic life. Our baptismal covenant calls upon us to seek
and serve Christ in all persons loving our neighbor as our self; and to strive
for justice and peace among all people and respect the dignity of every human
being (Book of Common Prayer, p. 305).

Jim Wallis
of Sojourners Magazine visited the
Occupy Wall Street movement earlier this month…He asked one of the non-leaders
participating about what had drawn him to the protest. The person answered him, “"I want to
have children someday, and this is becoming a world not good for
children."[9]

In a thoughtful
and reflective “Open Letter” sent out on-line this past week, Jim Wallis wrote
to those participating in the Occupy Wall Street movement about that response
from the person concerning the world “not being good for children.” Wallis wrote to the demonstrators, “My 13-
and 8-year-old boys came to mind when I heard his answer, and I felt thankful.
It is precisely those deepest, most authentic feelings and motivations that
should preoccupy you, rather than how best to form and communicate superficial
political rhetoric. You are raising very
basic questions about an economy that has become increasingly unfair, unstable,
unsustainable, and unhappy for a growing number of people. Those same questions
are being asked by many others at the bottom, the middle, and even some at the
top of the economic pecking order. There are ethics to be named here, and the
transition from the pseudo-ethic of endless growth to the moral ethics of
sustainability is a conversation occurring even now in our nation’s business
schools (if, perhaps, secreted inside the official curriculum).”[10]

“Keep
pressing those values questions,” Wallis urged the demonstrators, “because they
will move people more than a set of demands or policy suggestions.” “Those can
and must,” he observed, “come later.”[11]

He
continued, “And try not to demonize those you view as opponents, as good people
can get trapped in bad systems and we've seen a lot of that. Still, you are
right for saying that we all must be held accountable -- both systems and the
individuals within them. It is imperative that we hear that message right now. The new safe spaces you have created to ask
fundamental questions, now in hundreds of locations around the country and the
world, are helping to carve out fresh societal space to examine ourselves --
who we are, what we value most, and where we want to go from here.”[12]Who we are, what do we value most, and where
we want to go from here.

And they brought him a
denarius. Then he said to them,
"Whose head is this, and whose title?" They answered, "The emperor's."
Then he said to them, "Give therefore to the emperor the things that are
the emperor's, and to God the things that are God's" (Matthew 22:19 –
21).

Who are
you? Jesus was asking those disciples of the Pharisees and Herodians. Who are you? Jesus asks us through today’s
Gospel reading….What do you value most?
Where do you want to go from here?

Jesus once
said, “Where your treasure is, there your heart will be also” (Matthew
6:21). As we continue to struggle with
the questions that confront us in our society and around the world; questions
about justice and fairness and especially about human dignity, it is important
to ask, what belongs to Caesar and Caesar’s kingdom that does not first belong
to God and God’s kingdom? Which are we
serving? Which ought we to serve? Who, what, occupies our hearts?

[1] Bellafante, Ginia “Gunning for Wall Street,
with Faulty Aim” - New York Times
On-Line – Published September 23, 2011 at http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/25/nyregion/protesters-are-gunning-for-wall-street-with-faulty-aim.html

[3] Noonan, Peggy “This is No Time for
Moderation” The Wall Street Journal On-Line, October 15, 2011 at http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204002304576629460239286474.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_BelowLEFTSecond

[9] Wallis, Jim “An Open Letter to the Occupiers
from a Veteran Troublemaker” October 13, 2011 found on God’s Politics blog at http://blog.sojo.net/2011/10/13/an-open-letter-to-the-occupiers-from-a-veteran-troublemaker/